I know this sounds a lot like this similarly-worded question, but there are differences, so bear with me.
I'm trying to create a reusable "Timer" class which calls a specified callback every N seconds, until you call stop. As inspiration, I used the link above, with a built-in event wrapped in a stop method. Here's how the basic class looks:
import time
import threading
from threading import Thread
from threading import Event
# Mostly inspired by https://stackoverflow.com/questions/12435211/python-threading-timer-repeat-function-every-n-seconds
class RepeatingTimer(Thread):
def __init__(self, interval_seconds, callback):
Thread.__init__(self)
self.stop_event = Event()
self.interval_seconds = interval_seconds
self.callback = callback
self.setDaemon(True)
def start(self):
while not self.stop_event.wait(self.interval_seconds):
self.callback()
time.sleep(0) # doesn't seem to do anything
def stop(self):
self.stop_event.set()
Looks good, even includes time.sleep(0) based on this question.
It doesn't do what I thought; the call to start never seems to return or yield, ever. Consider this use-case:
def print_status(message):
print(message)
def print_r1():
print_status("R1")
def print_r2():
print_status("R2")
r1 = RepeatingTimer(1, print_r1)
r2 = RepeatingTimer(0.5, print_r2)
r1.start()
r2.start()
The call to r1.start never terminates. It continues on forever. The output on the console, after four seconds, is:
R1
R1
R1
R1
This prompted me to introduce the time.sleep(0) call, although that doesn't seem to do anything.
I also tried with and without self.setDaemon(True), but that also seems to have no effect.
I also tried converting this into two classes: one with just the event wrappers (a StoppableTimer class), and another that simply creates and recreates the StoppableTimer in the callback, but that doesn't work either. Here's what it looks like:
class StoppableTimer(Thread):
def __init__(self, interval_seconds, callback):
Thread.__init__(self)
self.stop_event = Event()
self.interval_seconds = interval_seconds
self.callback = callback
self.setDaemon(True)
def start(self):
time.sleep(self.interval_seconds)
self.callback()
def stop(self):
self.stop_event.set()
class RepeatingTimer:
def __init__(self, interval_seconds, callback):
self.interval_seconds = interval_seconds
self.callback = callback
self.timer = StoppableTimer(interval_seconds, self.refresh_timer)
def start(self):
self.timer.start()
def stop(self):
self.timer.stop()
def refresh_timer(self):
self.stop()
self.callback()
self.timer = StoppableTimer(self.interval_seconds, self.refresh_timer)
self.timer.start()
I'm completely at a loss on how to make this work. I'm also mostly a beginner to Python, so please add sufficient explanation to your answer so I can grasp what the fundamental issue is.
I also read a bit about the Global Interpreter Lock on SO, but I don't understand how that could be an issue.
For reference, I'm running Python 3.6.3 on Ubuntu 17.10
Short answer :
Don't override start(). Override run() instead.
Long answer because you're asking for details :
With the class definition in your first snippet, you've created a class which inherits from Thread, however you've overriden the start() method supposed to start your thread by a new method which is looping until the stop_event is set, that is to say, the method supposed to actually start your thread doesn't do this anymore.
So, when you try to start your thread, you actually run the loop calling your callback function in your current and only thread. And since it's an infinite loop, your second "thread" is not started, and you have no way to "stop" it.
You mustn't override start (well not in this way). Instead, override the run method. This is the method that will be run by your thread when you start it.
Also, you should do super().__init__() instead of Thread.__init__(self). The first one is the proper way to call an inherited method in Python.
class RepeatingTimer(Thread):
def __init__(self, interval_seconds, callback):
super().__init__()
self.stop_event = Event()
self.interval_seconds = interval_seconds
self.callback = callback
def run(self):
while not self.stop_event.wait(self.interval_seconds):
self.callback()
def stop(self):
self.stop_event.set()
And with the functions you've defined you can do :
r1 = RepeatingTimer(1, print_r1)
r2 = RepeatingTimer(0.5, print_r2)
r1.start()
r2.start()
time.sleep(4)
r1.stop()
r2.stop()
Here is the relevant documentation for Thread.
Related
I want to have a main program that works like a console from where I can call other processes (infinite loops) and kill them selectively whenever certain commands are entered.
For that I created this class:
class RunInThread(threading.Thread):
def __init__(self, function):
self.function = function
self.kill_pill = threading.Event()
threading.Thread.__init__(self)
def start(self): # This is controversial.
self.__init__(self.function)
threading.Thread.start(self)
def stop(self):
self.kill_pill.set()
def run(self):
while not self.kill_pill.is_set():
self.function()
The documentation for thread.Thread says that only the __init__() and run() methods should be overridden.
Is there any clear issue with my code? It works the way I intended but since it's going to be running for long periods of time I need to make sure I'm not creating any memory problems.
EDIT:
What about this solution?:
class StoppableThread(threading.Thread):
# threading.Thread class but can be stopped with the stop() method.
def __init__(self, function):
threading.Thread.__init__(self)
self.function = function
self.kill_pill = threading.Event()
def stop(self):
self.kill_pill.set()
def run(self):
while not self.kill_pill.is_set():
self.function()
class RunInThread():
def __init__(self, function, prnt=False):
self.function = function
self.running = False
self.prnt = prnt
def start(self):
if not self.running:
self.thread = StoppableThread(self.function)
self.thread.start()
self.running = True
else:
if self.prnt:
print('Thread already running.')
def stop(self):
self.thread.stop()
self.running = False
If you want to find out what things that could break, I'd suggest looking into the implementation of Thread class.
Among other things, Thread.__init__() initialises an Event() object to detect thread startup and shutdown, manages cleanup hooks/callbacks, some internal lock objects, and registers the thread to a list so you can introspect running threads. By calling Thread.__init__(), these variables gets reinitialised and screws up the internal mechanisms of many of these functionalities.
What could go wrong? I didn't test any of these, but from skimming through threading.py, these are likely some of the things that I expect could go wrong:
your python process now will be running a OS threads that doesn't show up in enumerate_thread()
multiple OS thread will now return the same Thread object when it calls current_thread(), which will likely also break threadlocal and anything that depends on threadlocal
Thread.join() depends on some internal locks, which likely would now become thread unsafe to call
Unhandled reception can go to the wrong exception hook handler
register_at_fork and shutdown handler likely will get confused
In other words, don't try to be sneaky. Create a new Thread object for each thread you want to start.
There's a good reason that the Thread class spent efforts trying to prevent you from accidentally calling start() twice. Don't try to subvert this.
I need to pause and resume thread, which continuously executes some task. Execution begins when start() is called, it should not be interrupted and must continue from the point when pause() is called.
How can I do this?
Please remember that using threads in Python will not grant you a parallel processing, except for the case of IO blocking operations. For more information on this, take a look at this and this
You cannot pause a Thread arbitrarily in Python (please keep that in mind before reading further). I am neither sure you have a way to do that at an OS level (e.g. by using pure-C). What you can do is allow the thread to be paused at specific points you consider beforehand. I will give you an example:
class MyThread(threading.Thread):
def __init__(self, *args, **kwargs):
super(MyThread, self).__init__(*args, **kwargs)
self._event = threading.Event()
def run(self):
while True:
self.foo() # please, implement this.
self._event.wait()
self.bar() # please, implement this.
self._event.wait()
self.baz() # please, implement this.
self._event.wait()
def pause(self):
self._event.clear()
def resume(self):
self._event.set()
This approach will work but:
Threading is usually a bad idea, based on the links I gave you.
You have to code the run method by yourself, with this approach. This is because you need to have control over the exact points you'd like to check for pause, and this implies accessing the Thread object (perhaps you'd like to create an additional method instead of calling self._event.wait()).
The former point makes clear that you cannot pause arbitrarily, but just when you specified you could pause. Avoid having long operations between pause points.
Edit I did not test this one, but perhaps this will work without so much subclassing if you need more than one thread like this:
class MyPausableThread(threading.Thread):
def __init__(self, group=None, target=None, name=None, args=(), kwargs={}):
self._event = threading.Event()
if target:
args = (self,) + args
super(MyPausableThread, self).__init__(group, target, name, args, kwargs)
def pause(self):
self._event.clear()
def resume(self):
self._event.set()
def _wait_if_paused(self):
self._event.wait()
This should allow you to create a custom thread without more subclassing, by calling MyPausableThread(target=myfunc).start(), and your callable's first parameter will receive the thread object, from which you can call self._wait_if_paused() when you need to pause-check.
Or even better, if you want to isolate the target from accessing the thread object:
class MyPausableThread(threading.Thread):
def __init__(self, group=None, target=None, name=None, args=(), kwargs={}):
self._event = threading.Event()
if target:
args = ((lambda: self._event.wait()),) + args
super(MyPausableThread, self).__init__(group, target, name, args, kwargs)
def pause(self):
self._event.clear()
def resume(self):
self._event.set()
And your target callable will receive in the first parameter a function that can be called like this: pause_checker() (provided the first param in the target callable is named pause_checker).
You can do this by attaching a trace function that causes all other threads to wait for a signal:
import sys
import threading
import contextlib
# needed to enable tracing
if not sys.gettrace():
sys.settrace(lambda *args: None)
def _thread_frames(thread):
for thread_id, frame in sys._current_frames().items():
if thread_id == thread.ident:
break
else:
raise ValueError("No thread found")
# walk up to the root
while frame:
yield frame
frame = frame.f_back
#contextlib.contextmanager
def thread_paused(thread):
""" Context manager that pauses a thread for its duration """
# signal for the thread to wait on
e = threading.Event()
for frame in _thread_frames(thread):
# attach a new temporary trace handler that pauses the thread
def new(frame, event, arg, old = frame.f_trace):
e.wait()
# call the old one, to keep debuggers working
if old is not None:
return old(frame, event, arg)
frame.f_trace = new
try:
yield
finally:
# wake the other thread
e.set()
Which you can use as:
import time
def run_after_delay(func, delay):
""" Simple helper spawning a thread that runs a function in the future """
def wrapped():
time.sleep(delay)
func()
threading.Thread(target=wrapped).start()
main_thread = threading.current_thread()
def interrupt():
with thread_paused(main_thread):
print("interrupting")
time.sleep(2)
print("done")
run_after_delay(interrupt, 1)
start = time.time()
def actual_time(): return time.time() - start
print("{:.1f} == {:.1f}".format(0.0, actual_time()))
time.sleep(0.5)
print("{:.1f} == {:.1f}".format(0.5, actual_time()))
time.sleep(2)
print("{:.1f} != {:.1f}".format(2.5, actual_time()))
Giving
0.0 0.0
0.5 0.5
interrupting
done
2.5 3.0
Note how the interrupt causes the sleep on the main thread to wait longer
You can do this using Process class from psutil library.
Example:
>>> import psutil
>>> pid = 7012
>>> p = psutil.Process(pid)
>>> p.suspend()
>>> p.resume()
See this answer: https://stackoverflow.com/a/14053933
Edit: This method will suspend the whole process, not only one thread. ( I don't delete this answer, so others can know this method won't work.)
while(int(any) < 2000):
sleep(20)
print(waiting any...)
In another class:
self.workerThread = WorkerThread()
def startThread():
self.workerThread.setGameName("pizza")
self.workerThread.start()
QThread class:
class WorkerThread(QThread):
def _init_(self, parent = None):
super(WorkerThread, self)._init_(parent)
self.gameName = ""
def setGameName(self, currGameName):
self.gameName = currGameName
def run(self):
#do something with self.gameName
In main:
startThread()
startThread()
When I run this, it uses the gameName from the first call and not the second. The function calls seem interleaved. Can someone explain how Qthread works? How do i set a gameName for each individual function call of startThread()?
If start() is called twice on a QThread then the second call will do nothing if the thread is still running. It looks like there's a good chance this is what's happening, and if not then it's only due to luck.
I want to make a simple server-like program, which can run in loop and read and process messages sent to it. And when I start it like Server().start it obviously runs in loop forever. Is there a way to run it in background and feed it with data, which will be proceeded?
class Server:
def __init__(self):
self.messages = []
self.running = False
def start(self):
self.running = True
self.work()
def send_mess(self, message):
self.messages.append(message)
def handle_mess(self):
for mess in self.messages:
self.do_calculations(mess)
def work(self):
while self.running:
self.handle_mess(self)
self.do_some_important_stuff()
def do_some_important_stuff():
pass
def do_calculations():
pass
Seems like you could use Thread class from the threading module.
It works by inheriting it and redefine run method. Then you issue obj.start() and you'll make start method run in parallel.
Roughly, your class can be define like this (I made some corrections to some methods in order to run)
import threading
class Server(threading.Thread):
def __init__(self):
super(Server, self).__init__()
self.messages = []
self.running = False
def run(self): # changed name start for run
self.running = True
self.work()
def send_mess(self, message):
self.messages.append(message)
def handle_mess(self):
for mess in self.messages:
self.do_calculations(mess)
def work(self):
while self.running:
self.handle_mess()
self.do_some_important_stuff()
def do_some_important_stuff(self):
pass
def do_calculations(self):
pass
s = Server()
s.start() # now is in another another thread running
s.join() # wait for it to finnish
IMPORTANT: Copying #Alfe comment which I found extremely useful:
One MUST point out that by entering the world of concurrency (by threading) one opens a nasty can of worms. OP, you really really should read a little more about concurrency problems which occur in parallel environments. Otherwise you are bound to end with a serious problem sooner or later which you have no clue how to solve. See that you understand Queue.Queue (Queue.queue in Python3) and the things in threading like Events, Locks, Semaphores and what they are good for.
Hope this helps!
An easy way would be:
def start(self):
self.running = True
thread = Thread(target = self.work, args = ())
thread.start()
To start just one background thread (another way is to extend the threading.Thread class).
Or:
def work(self):
while self.running:
message = self.handle_mess(self) # gets a message
def threaded_part(m):
self.do_some_important_stuff(m)
self.do_other_important_stuff(m)
thread = Thread(target = threaded_part, args = (message))
thread.start()
To start a thread for each message you receive. Anyway, with a thread pool it would probably be better.
I have a Manager (main thread), that creates other Threads to handle various operations.
I would like my Manager to be notified when a Thread it created ends (when run() method execution is finished).
I know I could do it by checking the status of all my threads with the Thread.isActive() method, but polling sucks, so I wanted to have notifications.
I was thinking of giving a callback method to the Threads, and call this function at the end of the run() method:
class Manager():
...
MyThread(self.on_thread_finished).start() # How do I pass the callback
def on_thread_finished(self, data):
pass
...
class MyThread(Thread):
...
def run(self):
....
self.callback(data) # How do I call the callback?
...
Thanks!
The thread can't call the manager unless it has a reference to the manager. The easiest way for that to happen is for the manager to give it to the thread at instantiation.
class Manager(object):
def new_thread(self):
return MyThread(parent=self)
def on_thread_finished(self, thread, data):
print thread, data
class MyThread(Thread):
def __init__(self, parent=None):
self.parent = parent
super(MyThread, self).__init__()
def run(self):
# ...
self.parent and self.parent.on_thread_finished(self, 42)
mgr = Manager()
thread = mgr.new_thread()
thread.start()
If you want to be able to assign an arbitrary function or method as a callback, rather than storing a reference to the manager object, this becomes a bit problematic because of method wrappers and such. It's hard to design the callback so it gets a reference to both the manager and the thread, which is what you will want. I worked on that for a while and did not come up with anything I'd consider useful or elegant.
Anything wrong with doing it this way?
from threading import Thread
class Manager():
def Test(self):
MyThread(self.on_thread_finished).start()
def on_thread_finished(self, data):
print "on_thread_finished:", data
class MyThread(Thread):
def __init__(self, callback):
Thread.__init__(self)
self.callback = callback
def run(self):
data = "hello"
self.callback(data)
m = Manager()
m.Test() # prints "on_thread_finished: hello"
If you want the main thread to wait for children threads to finish execution, you are probably better off using some kind of synchronization mechanism. If simply being notified when one or more threads has finished executing, a Condition is enough:
import threading
class MyThread(threading.Thread):
def __init__(self, condition):
threading.Thread.__init__(self)
self.condition = condition
def run(self):
print "%s done" % threading.current_thread()
with self.condition:
self.condition.notify()
condition = threading.Condition()
condition.acquire()
thread = MyThread(condition)
thread.start()
condition.wait()
However, using a Queue is probably better, as it makes handling multiple worker threads a bit easier.